¶óÆæÆ®¦¢Ä«Æä¦¢ºí·Î±×¦¢´õº¸±â
¾ÆÄ«µ¥¹Ì Ȩ ¸í»çƯ°­ ´ëÇבּ¸½Ç޹æ Á¶°æ½Ç¹« µ¿¿µ»ó°­ÀÇ Çѱ¹ÀÇ ÀüÅëÁ¤¿ø ÇÐȸº° ³í¹®
ÇÐȸº° ³í¹®

Çѱ¹°Ç¼³°ü¸®ÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹°ÇÃà½Ã°øÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹µµ·ÎÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹»ý¹°È¯°æÁ¶ÀýÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹»ýÅÂÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹¼öÀÚ¿øÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹½Ä¹°ÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹½Ç³»µðÀÚÀÎÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹ÀÚ¿ø½Ä¹°ÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹ÀܵðÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹Á¶°æÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹Áö¹Ý°øÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹ÇÏõȣ¼öÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹È¯°æ»ý¹°ÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹È¯°æ»ýÅÂÇÐȸ

Çѱ¹ÀÚ¿ø½Ä¹°ÇÐȸ / v.5, no.1, 1992³â, pp.25-29
¹éÇϼö¿À , ´õ´ö , °íµé»©±âÀÇ È­ÇмººÐ
( Chemical Constituents of Cynochum wilfordi , Codonopsis lanceolata and lxeris sonchifolia )
ÀÌ»ó·¡; ;
 
ÃÊ ·Ï
The proximate and amino acid composition of wild and cultivated Cynochum wilfordi, Codopsis lancolata and lxeris sonchifolia were analyzed. Cynochum wilfordi, had higher contents of sugar ascompared with Codonopsis lancolata and lxeris sonchifolia. Fats was 2-3 times higher in Cynochumwilordi then Codonopsis lancolata and lxeris sonchifolia. No significant difference in the contents wasfound between the open field root, spontanity and cultivated at 30'c in biotronroom at condonopsislanceolata. However, contents of protein was 12.8% in lxeris sonchifolia. Total amino acid were 1.5-1.8 times higher in lxeris sonchifolia. than Cynochum wilfordi and Codonopsis lancolata. The decresingorder of the amounts of amino acid infused from the Cynochum wilfordi samples was Glu, Arg, Asp,Leu, Pro, Lys, Codonopsis lancolata (Changdeuk) was Arg, Glu, Pro, Leu, Asp, Lys, Codonopsislanceilata(Chirisan) was Arg, Glu, Pro, Asp, Lys, Leu, Codonopsis lancolata(Yeanbeun) was Arg,Glu, Asp, Leu, Ser, Lys, and lxeris sonchifolia was Glu, Arg, Asp, Cys, Lys, Pro.
 
Ű¿öµå
 
Çѱ¹ÀÚ¿ø½Ä¹°ÇÐȸÁö / v.5, no.1, 1992³â, pp.25-29
Çѱ¹ÀÚ¿ø½Ä¹°ÇÐȸ
ISSN : 1226-3591
UCI : G100:I100-KOI(KISTI1.1003/JNL.JAKO199211920277609)
¾ð¾î : Çѱ¹¾î
³í¹® Á¦°ø : KISTI Çѱ¹°úÇбâ¼úÁ¤º¸¿¬±¸¿ø
¸ñ·Ïº¸±â
ȸ»ç¼Ò°³ ±¤°í¾È³» ÀÌ¿ë¾à°ü °³ÀÎÁ¤º¸Ãë±Þ¹æÄ§ Ã¥ÀÓÀÇ ÇѰè¿Í ¹ýÀû°íÁö À̸ÞÀÏÁÖ¼Ò ¹«´Ü¼öÁý °ÅºÎ °í°´¼¾ÅÍ
   

ÇÏÀ§¹è³ÊÀ̵¿